Proposed billboard gets nixed in Middle Smithfield Township

Sunday

Apr 28, 2013 at 12:01 AM

WAYNE WITKOWSKI

Middle Smithfield Township Board of Supervisors unanimously rejected a request by Adams Outdoor Advertising to replace a wooden billboard with a larger, digital one on Ed Regina's property at the corner of Route 209 and Hollow Road.

After a brief public hearing Thursday that elicited no comment from residents, supervisors followed the recommendation of the township Zoning Board after its hearing on the issue to deny a conditional-use approval, because Adams intended to build a two-sided sign.

The current 240-square-foot, single-sided billboard — which would be replaced with a 288-square-foot, double-sided digital billboard — was erected by the Reginas in the 1960s, well before the township's first zoning ordinance in 1977 was updated in 2010.

It has been grandfathered in as a nonconforming but allowable use.

Attorney Victor Cavacini was the only speaker during the comment period, saying that his company had met the setback concerns expressed by the township Planning Board that a higher digital sign would interfere with overhead power lines. Its leading edge would be moved 10 feet from the roads to 12 feet away.

The digital sign would have an automatic dimmer to control glare and adjust for time of day and weather, Adams Vice President for Real Estate Lois Arciszewski testified during the Zoning Board hearing.

It would be tied into automatic state, federal and police emergency messages warning of wrecks, storms or crimes. But township Zoning Office Wayne Rohner said at the hearing that it would set a precedent for more digital billboards in the township, although Cavacini noted at that hearing that digital signs are allowed under the ordinance.

"The company had gotten a variance, but only for a single-sided sign," township attorney Michael Gaul explained afterward. "In my eyes, they did not get adequate variance relief to support the plan they submitted."

Gaul said the company may appeal the supervisors' decision, because it had appealed the zoning board decision.